In a pedestrian–streetcar collision action, a transit authority brought a summary judgment motion seeking dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim against its municipal co‑defendant.
The moving party argued that it would assume responsibility for maintenance of trees on a median that allegedly obstructed the streetcar operator’s view and relied on statutory provisions of the City of Toronto Act.
The court held that the summary judgment rules could permit a defendant to seek dismissal of a claim against a co‑defendant, but the evidentiary record revealed genuine issues requiring a trial regarding responsibility for the median and trees.
Ownership of the land remained with the municipality and the statutory provision did not bar claims where the property was not the transit authority’s.
The motion was dismissed and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
